Current:Home > reviewsHere's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases -Nova Finance Academy
Here's how each Supreme Court justice voted to decide the affirmative action cases
View
Date:2025-04-14 12:09:13
The Supreme Court decided 6-3 and 6-2 that race-conscious admission policies of the University of North Carolina and Harvard College violate the Constitution, effectively bringing to an end to affirmative action in higher education through a decision that will reverberate across campuses nationwide.
The rulings fell along ideological lines. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion for both cases, and Justice Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh wrote concurring opinions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissenting opinion. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has ties to Harvard and recused herself in that case, but wrote a dissent in the North Carolina case.
The ruling is the latest from the Supreme Court's conservative majority that has upended decades of precedent, including overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022.
- Read the full text of the decision
Here's how the justices split on the affirmative action cases:
Supreme Court justices who voted against affirmative action
The court's six conservatives formed the majority in each cases. Roberts' opinion was joined by Thomas, Samuel Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The chief justice wrote that Harvard and UNC's race-based admission guidelines "cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause."
"Respondents' race-based admissions systems also fail to comply with the Equal Protection Clause's twin commands that race may never be used as a 'negative' and that it may not operate as a stereotype," Roberts wrote. "The First Circuit found that Harvard's consideration of race has resulted in fewer admissions of Asian-American students. Respondents' assertion that race is never a negative factor in their admissions programs cannot withstand scrutiny. College admissions are zerosum, and a benefit provided to some applicants but not to others necessarily advantages the former at the expense of the latter. "
Roberts said that prospective students should be evaluated "as an individual — not on the basis of race," although universities can still consider "an applicant's discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise."
Supreme Court justices who voted to uphold affirmative action
The court's three liberals all opposed the majority's decision to reject race as a factor in college admissions. Sotomayor's dissent was joined by Justice Elena Kagan in both cases, and by Jackson in the UNC case. Both Sotomayor and Kagan signed onto Jackson's dissent as well.
Sotomayor argued that the admissions processes are lawful under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
"The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment enshrines a guarantee of racial equality," Sotomayor wrote. "The Court long ago concluded that this guarantee can be enforced through race-conscious means in a society that is not, and has never been, colorblind."
In her dissent in the North Carolina case, Jackson recounted the long history of discrimination in the U.S. and took aim at the majority's ruling.
"With let-them-eat-cake obliviousness, today, the majority pulls the ripcord and announces 'colorblindness for all' by legal fiat," Jackson wrote. "But deeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life."
Melissa Quinn contributed to this report.
- In:
- Affirmative Action
- Supreme Court of the United States
veryGood! (5)
Related
- Louvre will undergo expansion and restoration project, Macron says
- Secret history: Even before the revolution, America was a nation of conspiracy theorists
- Takeaways from the AP’s look at the role of conspiracy theories in American politics and society
- Elon Musk cannot keep Tesla pay package worth more than $55 billion, judge rules
- Why members of two of EPA's influential science advisory committees were let go
- PGA Tour strikes $3 billion deal with Fenway-led investment group. Players to get equity ownership
- Investigator describes Michigan school shooter’s mom as cold after her son killed four students
- Travis Kelce Shares Sweet Message for Taylor Swift Ahead of 2024 Grammys
- Sarah J. Maas books explained: How to read 'ACOTAR,' 'Throne of Glass' in order.
- Whether You're Rooting for the Chiefs or the 49ers, These Red Lipsticks Are Kiss-Proof
Ranking
- Working Well: When holidays present rude customers, taking breaks and the high road preserve peace
- Police: Pennsylvania man faces charges after decapitating father, posting video on YouTube
- Secret history: Even before the revolution, America was a nation of conspiracy theorists
- Boeing declines to give a financial outlook as it focuses on quality and safety
- McConnell absent from Senate on Thursday as he recovers from fall in Capitol
- UPS to layoff nearly 12,000 employees across the globe to 'align resources for 2024'
- Man accused of beheading his father, police investigating video allegedly showing him with the head
- Zayn Malik Talks 2024 Goals, Setting the Bar High, and Finding Balance
Recommendation
EU countries double down on a halt to Syrian asylum claims but will not yet send people back
California man who blamed twin brother for cold case rapes of girl and jogger is sentenced to 140 years in prison
For Chicago's new migrants, informal support groups help ease the pain and trauma.
Oregon decriminalized drugs in 2020. Now officials are declaring a fentanyl state of emergency
Dick Vitale announces he is cancer free: 'Santa Claus came early'
Syphilis cases rise to their highest levels since the 1950s, CDC says
Elmo wrote a simple tweet that revealed widespread existential dread. Now, the president has weighed in.
The Federal Reserve holds interest rates steady but signals rate cuts may be coming